Thank you Peter Whish-Wilson for your pre-eminent role in calling the Senate inquiries into Financial Services and MIS Schemes ( TT HERE ).

Tens of thousands of investors and all taxpayers should not have to accept the amoral behaviour of financial professionals and their institutions any longer.

The very mention by Korda Mentha of their intention to restructure Arrium is hypocritical in the extreme. From my direct experience of their efforts with kleptocratic pals PPB Advisory in the Gunns Plantations sale, they assiduously undermined any prospect of establishing alternative Responsible Entities to protect grower investor interests.

Instead in the pooled sale arrangements they used the value of grower investors’ trees to subsidise the Gunns and Banks misadventure in developing the Tamar pulp mill.

An indicative $50M was allocated to the Receivers by the Court for the unsold mill! Many inflated millions more were allocated to land rental for land never to be rented, and to two nurseries to produce 8M seedlings pa to 2060 - one of which is barely operating, if at all, and the other running at a minimum sustainable level.

Yes the schemes failed, but savvy New Forests picked up the trees for a song. AND the Liquidators and Receivers are drunk on outrageous, unjustifiable fees. AND the Court has learned nothing but to defer to ‘commercial negotiation’ and poor precedent again.

Today, Primary Securities, who can recount their travails with the Receivers, advised 2000-01 Gunns Plantations’ growers of their likely returns. After sustained belligerent obstruction from KM and PPB, PS successfully established themselves as an alternative and replacement RE with the support of growers.

This plucky, small firm of less than 10 staff has now harvested almost 3/4 of these schemes for forecast distributions of $2200 - $2500 /ha AFTER the Receivers ambit claim of $1800 /ha to restore and replant. The Receivers withheld their acceptance of the pre-harvest Forestry Practice Plans. To restore or replant was never the obligation of MIS investors. This is the Receivers playing their ‘we’ll see you in Court for interminable, excruciatingly expensive legal action’ trump card before we concede a schekel or a right or decent moral position.

So $4000 - $4300 /ha return for growers doing it themselves (still for pulp, no clearwood, at firesale) versus less than 1/10th of that to be returned by the big boys for the subsequent years of GPL schemes they’ve sold.

Korda Mentha, PPB Advisory and the Supreme Court of Victoria have much to answer for. Once hopeful of much more, I now despise them, and have no faith in their oversight of ‘fair and equitable’ outcomes.

The evidence is in the Liquidation/Receiver industry is a sham.

*Trevor Burdon is a business and IT consultant based in Melbourne. A Tasmanian interested in sustainable inputs to Tasmanian forestry industry, he invested in early Gunns MIS clear wood schemes. Uniquely he has appeared as a individual contradictor in the Gunns’ Liquidation proceedings, and was an in-camera witness to the Senate Inquiry into MIS schemes.

Picture Martin Hawes

• Mercury: Former Australian Greens leader Bob Brown calls for ban on autumn Forestry burnsPARTS of Tasmania have recorded worse air pollution readings than London and Los Angeles as autumn regeneration, hazard reduction and private burn-offs blanketed parts of the state in thick haze during the past 48 hours. … In New Norfolk, the air quality index for particulate matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter, known as PM10, peaked at 117 in the 48 hours to 4pm yesterday, while in Huonville the index reached 52.

• John Hayward in Comments:The Mercury underplayed Tassie’s stature, with the ABC reporting this morning that the pollution levels in the Derwent Valley matched those in the notorious parts of India and China. Tasmania’s “green” brand may need an asterisk explaining that it refers to the gills of residents. And this is after FT claimed that it has a zero net contribution to climate change emissions.

The Mercury underplayed Tassie’s stature, with the ABC reporting this morning that the pollution levels in the Derwent Valley matched those in the notorious parts of India and China.

Tasmania’s “green” brand may need an asterisk explaining that it refers to the gills of residents. And this is after FT claimed that it has a zero net contribution to climate change emissions.

John Hayward

Posted by john hayward on 21/04/16 at 09:02 AM

Well written Trevor Burdon, I can attest to all you say about Korda Mentha and their servants PPB Advisory shakedown. I have watched it all unfold.
I have read of the High Court hearing when Korda Mentha tried to have their fees recognized as being fair and reasonable, what a sham that was.
White collar crime proliferates in Victoria NSW and Queensland.
The lack of prudent regulatory Authorities has caused much grief to many undeserving people.

Some 2 years ago I sent off a KM and BBP Advisory report to Senator John Williams, he is the man that sat on the Senate committee Inquiry into the Commonwealth Bank and the fact that they were in bed with ASIC.
Their time will come, however money rules over all institutions in Australia today and is being pushed along by Malcolm Turnbull.
It will be no hard task to see Malcolm Turnbull pushed aside for that very reason.
Australia itself will collapse under the policy and agendas of the Liberal Pharaohs and their love for the American model.
I shudder for our futures.

Posted by William Boeder on 21/04/16 at 09:22 AM

#2. William, my last action in the GPL proceeding is likely to be a challenge to the last tranche of costs. Building on my first I think it could be quite strong, especially as I’m likely to be joined by a lawyer grower who is knowledgeable in the negotiation of such costs.

Do you have a link to the Case you mention?

Posted by Trevor Burdon on 21/04/16 at 10:24 AM

I read in the Mercury Mr Gutwein’s denial of abnormal levels of pollution and denigration of Bob Brown’s call in defence of tourism and clean air:

“‘No one should be surprised that Bob Brown wants to shut down the forestry industry. We’ve heard it all before,’ Mr Gutwein said. ‘Dr Brown should have a chat to Environment Tasmania about the fact that they clearly believe in the value of regeneration burns.’”

ABC radio news just reported the state government is placing regen burns on hold pending improved weather conditions. Obviously the Forestry Minister made an error of judgement and really meant to apologise. It didn’t stop all the usual commentariat and denialists from a good ol’ Greenie bash though. Hmm, maybe they are just plain wrong?

Posted by Mark Temby on 21/04/16 at 11:39 AM

Another sham industry!!?? If we’re not careful they’re all going to link up and reveal a sham democracy, with sham representatives, operating a sham ‘free market’ with sham capitalism.

Posted by Mike Bolan on 21/04/16 at 12:58 PM

Gut Whiner is at it again, burn, burn, burn, Lets start a ponsi fire we can all add to it and our clean green image can become like increasing power charges brown and out, after all we know that all this extra cost is free, cos we aint gunna be charged for it.
I hope the same criteria is used in his calculations, the money will magically appear, the taxpayer will not be required to contribute a penny towards anything and the surplice will be over his head, god knows how he and C.Hunt will credit us with our $500 for power (less the Carbon tax)
Money as Paul said as he resigned grows on our clear felled trees.

Posted by Chris on 21/04/16 at 01:09 PM

As for regen burns, burn hard and burn constistently whilst the autumn weather conditions are favorable.

The garbage portrayed by Dr Brown is the sort of rant we would expect from his anti native forestry agenda.

What does he want, us to import timber from the Pacific Rim/ SE Asia where countries are wrecking their forests wholesale and replacing them with palm oil plantations and land inundation due to expansion of Hydro schemes.

Brown has failed his basic silviculture knowledge test on wet forest eucalypt and the amount of smoke created is no worse than an average wildfire event.

I always enjoy the smell of native forest smoke especially when it mixes with the light rainfall we had today and I have no problem with it hanging around temporarily.
It wont hurt anybody and serves as a reminder that we are not a pack of weaklings after all.

If you want to smell pollution then go to the Sunshine Coast where excessive population growth creates a real sickly smell in the region.

And fuck the Environment Department this bunch of weak kneed poofters need to stand up to Taswater over the pitiful fresh water supply arrangements in some of our rural towns before they start pointing the finger about temporary smoke levels in the State due to Forestry burns.

Bugger off Brown ... (inference of violence deleted)

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 21/04/16 at 05:23 PM

re 5, alternatively, if they are not careful, we might just figure those shambolic linkages out for ourselves. A bit like the little kid who went off script and figured out that the king’s crown jewels were visible beneath the very expensive sham garments we are meant to be applauding.

I wonder what innovative solution Malcolm would have for that?

Posted by Simon Warriner on 21/04/16 at 05:31 PM

#7 “It won’t hurt anybody and serves as a reminder that we are not a pack of weaklings after all.”
Try telling that to anyone who has a compromised respiratory system……or indeed the health professionals charged with their care. You, sir, are an unfeeling ba***rd and a shocking apologist for outdated, archaic methods of conducting forestry.
Go away.

Posted by Artemisia on 22/04/16 at 08:29 AM

The last thing the banks want is an enquiry into how they extract more than 20 billion dollars a year in clear profit from 20 million people.

In the scale of things 125 million to keep the nose of a Royal Commission out of their affairs is a mere pittance.

Labor have not said they will hold a Royal Commission into the banks if elected nor is Shorten campaigning on this basis.

Why?

Because the Banks will immediately throw enormous sums of money at the Liberals to get them elected thereby protecting the system.

A rerun of Scrap the Carbon Tax a campaign paid for by the Big Polluters at the last election.

They are all scum and should be treated as such for in Australia you buy political allegiance and power using a corrupted system.

Abetz and the Liberals for a mere $50,000 is the Tasmanian end of this equation which sees political acceptance of the MIS rort and a Pulp Mill.

Then you get ... like Halton at #7.

Burn and Burn hard is Crap.

Trevor Burdon has placed before us how the system is broken. Showing how ordinary Australians are meekly extorted by our political masters be they Liberal or Labor; both operating at the behest of those who pay the piper.

The Piper is why the Murdochs of this world who play their tunes and who hate the Greens a thorn in their side that can pop the balloon.

Proper intergenerational planning was never given a chance Down Under ...

Posted by Frank again on 22/04/16 at 03:28 PM

Food for thought from the east of Oz

The aim of this discussion paper is to get us back in the race for green growth. It takes the view that we shouldn’t be a “fast follower” in the transition to a low-emissions world. Rather, we should be a “canny leader”—that is, we should follow where we must, but lead wherever we can. Because by leading on issues that affect us most, we gain disproportionately from finding solutions.

An example of canny leadership is our leading role in the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases. But this isn’t the only area we should be canny leaders on. Another is trees.

This discussion paper sets out to show the economic and environmental benefits of expanding our forests. Whatever is meant by “green growth” and the “green economy”, it will involve an economy that readily recognises the value of trees and has the capacity to expand forest stocks accordingly. ...

“We’ve never had a culture of forestry in this country. We’ve had a culture of cutting trees down and turning them into timber. But of forestry, of care for the forest, we’ve never had it.”
—Keith Stewart in the 2011 film “Song of the Kauri”.

New Zealand’s historical deforestation is substantial. No less than 70% of New Zealand’s original forest area has been lost since prehuman times as a result of burn-off, clearance, and logging.

To some extent, this historical forest loss is understandable, because people didn’t know then what we know now about the material impacts of deforestation. In hindsight, though, it’s obvious that a lot of land in New Zealand should never have been cleared in the first place.

First of all, deforestation heightens our vulnerability to various kinds of environmental damage and degradation, such as hillside erosion, flood incidence, soil deterioration, and poorer water quality. From a national perspective, these damages incur all sorts of costs—clean-up costs, degradation of assets, lost economic opportunities, reduced productivity, compensation costs—that impact upon the national balance sheet.

Fortunately the last of your post was censored, but good editorial discretion should have deleted the lot considering it didn’t contribute anything of substance.

Respiratory issues in your old age from smoke inhalation may be your karma yet?????

Posted by Ted Mead on 22/04/16 at 10:37 PM

I was in a state of shock and disbelief today when I read on TT such vile statements as “burn hard and burn consistently” and “limp wristed fainted hearted Green dreamers” and “I always enjoy the smell of native forest smoke…” and “it wont hurt anybody and serves as a reminder that we are not a pack of weaklings after all.” And then there was “fuck the Environment Department this bunch of weak kneed poofters” and “Bugger off Brown…”

I don’t know if the name “Robin Charles Halton” is a cowardly pseudonym or represents an actual person. Regardless, it saddens me to know that I have to share the planet with such a (person). Fortunately, I live 10,000 miles away in a place where he would never be welcome. If he were able to slither into my vicinity it would give me a great pleasure ...

It’s hard to imagine how so much hate, anger, resentment, ignorance and pure, devilish evil could have accumulated in a single person. Perhaps an exorcist is needed. ...

(edited)

Posted by Robert Middleton on 23/04/16 at 08:14 AM

RCH @ #7

“If you want to smell pollution then go to the Sunshine Coast where excessive population growth creates a real sickly smell in the region.”

I’m a little intrigued by this, can you elaborate pls ?

Posted by MJF on 23/04/16 at 08:39 AM

#7 RCH, seems another long term pro-logging forum attendee has revealed his deep inner feelings and may have also have placed his signature upon his own nil credibility status.

Posted by William Boeder on 23/04/16 at 09:31 AM

If you live in an affected area, take pictures, take samples if possible, every year. Form a group if there are costs collecting the data.

When you come down with COPD, asthma, heart disease or whatever, sue them.

Posted by Smokey Bare on 23/04/16 at 09:36 AM

There was never any concocked health warnings about the fuel reduction burns around Greater Hobart over the past two weeks.
And there is never a murmur about wild fire smoke either.
It seems strange that regeneration burn smoke stimulates the Greens only to drive their anti native forest harvesting agenda, that is the real reason.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 23/04/16 at 09:49 PM

$1 points out in an oblique way that the gross exposure to Particulate Matter of the 2 micron ranges mentioned [10 and 2.5] was at dangerous levels, even if that was for a short time.

Gutwein is lying. It is not possible to declare such peaks as in the normative range.

The important question is why do they lie.

Defending the indefensible only degrades credibility with all but the deluded who are hearing what they want to hear, lies [about the rocking of the boat].

Posted by phill Parsons on 24/04/16 at 07:32 AM

I’ve never been in favour of the ‘Code of Conduct’ that was introduced onto TT some years ago, though I can understand that our Editor, Lindsay would prefer that his ‘paper’ did not degenerate into an unattractive venue for the type of invective that Robin has exhibited in his #7.

My wish, however, is that this sort of bile is allowed to remain, as it shows quite clearly just what sort of mindset Robin’s views come from. Secondly, I am pleased to see readers themselves taking Robin to task for his shocking outburst. ‘Editorial’ intervention by the readership! We take responsibility for our TT and we repudiate rubbish such as Robin’s.

I worry at what ‘inferred violence’ was deleted. Bob has suffered violent attack and intimidation in the past as have others. Some used to take great delight in coming to his home and discharging their weapons, blasting his mailbox to bits, breaking in, stealing etc. Bob has more courage than me and I know that threats will not deter him. But the unfortunate thing about Robin’s shameful comment is that it might encourage others to think that homophobia, threats and unrestrained abuse are thing that we should tolerate.

Robin, you should be ashamed of what you wrote - you owe Lindsay and the general readership an apology.

Posted by Garry Stannus on 24/04/16 at 07:51 AM

#21 Gary, Bob Brown has gone outside the realm of all possibilities to gain media attention by making temporary smoke emission levels from autumn regen burns to pollution levels in two major cities London and Los Angeles obviously to gain attention to advocate the shutting down of native foresty operations.

If he wants to seek global attention at this level then the truth about him at a personal level is likely to emerge too.

If he moderates his tone maybe I will moderate mine towards him.

Brown is an attention seeker but is generally far less capable of being heard as there are far better Greens in the Parliament now apart from McKim, as it seeks that Tasmania is the breeding ground for Green troublemakers!

One has to only look at the Tas Forest Agreement, and absolute mess and its effects will be felt for generations to come.

Thank god Tasmania is spared from the inter decade rantings of Putt and Milne, Brown should retire to the quieter life couldnt he!

Intense burning is critical for regen burns to generate sufficient ash bed, sunlight and usually less smoke.
FT have taken the responsible actions achieved the planned burns while the limited opportunity presented itself during the dryer autumn.

Some smoke will always hang around for a few days dependent on weather conditions.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 24/04/16 at 11:02 AM

Robin Charles Halton can you please advise this forum of any of the good that has been achieved through the past 20 odd years in and by the unsustainable activity of logging this State of Tasmania?
Then can you discuss the enormous cost that has already been a huge burden placed upon the taxpayer during the same 20 odd years past, to allow this scurrilous activity to achieve some form of legitimacy?
Last of my 3 questions; how much has become the total debt (that is still an alive and breathing volume of debt) that has accrued throughout Tasmania, including the MIS scam ‘as it to was a product of the greed mania associated to the logging in this State by corporate rogue entities’ (not unlike that of Ta Ann today) then of any outstanding benefits that are today visible, as a legacy of all the logging of this State, (quoting the same period of the 20 past years) that we the people can be proud of?

Your many years engagement in the across the board destroying and destruction, (including the many millions of tonnes of wanton wasteful highly atmosphere-polluting incineration) of that which forested cover nature had provided upon this small island (small in comparison to the size of mainland Australia) should see you provide your well equipped capacity to write your honest accurate reply to these 3 basic questions.
(Should you need some level of aid or inspiration you might call upon the management of the Ta Ann operations in this State to fill in any blanks in your mind, to aid in your reply.)
This action in itself may see you redeem some degree of credibility if answered in truth.

Posted by William Boeder on 24/04/16 at 02:55 PM

#7 Thanks Mr Halton!
Nice cut and paste for cleanairtas.com

People know my position with regards to deliberate smoke across Tasmania, it stinks as bad as those who subscribe to it.

Posted by Clive Stott on 24/04/16 at 04:01 PM

Halton I am not a Green and I have never met or spoken to Bob Brown but I do admire a person who has courage over their convictions.

In 2006 Bob mortgaged his house to defend the habitat of the endangered Swift Parrot in the Wielangta Forest in South East Tasmania. He personally and at his own cost taking the issue of the failure of Forestry Tasmania to protect endangered species before the Federal Court.

He was successful.

The State and Federal Governments then changed the law making appeals pointless.

In 2009 Brown received a bill from Forestry Tasmania for the costs of the case and the appeals.

The Tasmanian Club of Pathetic Pollies and their sycophants felt pleased with their revenge.

Brown’s public admirers bailed him out.

Halton if you had a fraction of Brown’s fortitude and conviction you would have some right of comment regarding a Tasmanian and world icon who created an international political party virtually single handed.

I suggest that “Burn and Burn Hard” means that you in turn will be roasted on the spit of public opinion when the judgement day finally dawns.

A hatred of those who have the interests of our planet at heart brings its own retribution.

Posted by John Hawkins on 24/04/16 at 06:39 PM

My other point is that Bob Brown went out of his way to discredit tourism in Tasmania as a destination by opening his mouth too soon on top of that a gullible media gave Brown’s report unnecessary attention.

How are intending visitors react to this news, some who are not knowledgable of the reasons for burning may genuinely think the State is under siege from bushfires AGAIN and at the last minute cancel their trip altogether.

It could be said Brown is damaging the reputation of this state over sensationalism involving the temporary bush smoke emissions this autumn.

Its Brown who should apologise for blabbing to suit his own agenda to hinder native forest activities, unwittingly dragging our tourism image down with it.

In future Brown should carefully consider the broader effects of his statements as he may end up in hot water.

My only apology is to those who were inconvenienced by severe respiratory illness owing to the emissions from these burns.
As it stands the greater majority would have been previously notified of the intention to burn via media, radio TV ect and would locate themselves in a position to be able to cope while emissions were high.

Brown having the nerve to compare us to pollution levels on a global scale is most unreasonable.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 24/04/16 at 08:41 PM

#25. Perhaps the most powerful comment I have ever read in the Tasmanian Times.
Such is the dreaded evil of Forestry Tasmania then of its skeleton relatives and disparaged associates, that such an iconoclastic also ‘pyroclastic’ comment has rightfully become as so directed.
Behind all of this ‘whole GBE of Forestry Tasmania stage setting’ sit the hand clapping support group consisting of this State’s Premier and his trough of pernicious Liberal government ministers along with their Public Service ilk.
Justice and truth must be allowed their time in the sun.
My respect to you John Hawkins.

Posted by William Boeder on 24/04/16 at 10:21 PM

Robin Charles Halton, my questions at #23 have been rudely ignored, you have bivouacked around their need for answer, thus your credibility rests among the ashes of the most recent designated pyromanic-death pit within the remnant Tasmanian Natural Forested kingdom.
This satanic ritual ordered by the fickle dictates of this State government against the wishes of its people, then carried out by its bogan wood slaves, Forestry Tasmania.
All this thunder and anger cast upon Bob Brown.

...
There are a number of persons in this State that own distorted mirrors, can this be the reason for their purchase.
...

Posted by William Boeder on 25/04/16 at 09:46 AM

Robin Halton in #26: “My only apology is to those who were inconvenienced by severe respiratory illness owing to the emissions from these burns.”

Inconvenienced by severe respiratory illness?

Thanks for acknowledging these burns cause severe respiratory illness. That must be a first from you. Mind if I quote you from now on?

You’re apology is NOT accepted.

This smoke is not just a nuisance and no way could you ever describe a severe asthma/COPD, or heart attack, as an ‘inconvenience’.

Do some health research and show some empathy Robin Halton!

I will even make it easy for you. Go to http//www.cleanairtas.com

Posted by Clive Stott on 25/04/16 at 04:15 PM

re 7 Robin Charles Halton Your beloved FT is following a path of sheer wanton vandalism and you are defending it. Forest residue could and should be turned into stable charcoal or bio char and forestry would get a big tick but instead they are hell bent on adding to the destruction of our climate by burning the residue, releasing co2 and 2.5 particulate that is a proven extreme health risk into the world’s atmosphere.

Posted by max on 25/04/16 at 11:19 PM

#29 Clive Stott, you would have known about the intentions to burn and subsequent weather conditions as you continually watch these matters “like a hawk” so therefore my apology may not apply to you anyway, it basically applied to those sufferers who had little knowledge of the process.

For Mr hawkins, William Boeder and ect there is little can be done about the traditional practice of changing regen burning and fuel reduction, it remains a fact of life here in Tasmania burning debris or logging residues is the most effective method of creating a new forest and reducing the effects of wildfire at the same time.

This season I would expect that FT could burn with safety all of their outstanding areas and the fire authorities including private landowner should continue with extensive fuel reduction while the window of opportunity remains during the recent periods of exceptional weather for firing up the environment in order to reduce forest fuel build ups which eventually end up feeding bushfires.

Burning is the only way.

Posted by Robin Charles Halton on 26/04/16 at 10:03 AM

Forest residue is already turned into stable charcoal via high intensity burning. Charcoal is recognised as an even more stable form of carbon than biochar. Job done.

Why would anyone spend $1000’s/ha on gathering up, processing on or off site via chipping /shredding/hammermilling, then establishing an industrial scale dedicated pyrolysis plant, return the biochar to the original site, spread and work into soil if in fact the soil on site was suitable or in fact needed it after testing ?

Not opposed to it, just don’t see the benefits yet when carbon is already produced via hot burning nor can I see it economically feasible at this kind of scale.

I also understand (among other things) biochar cannot be allowed to dry out prior to any site application or the longer term water retention properties are severely diminished.

Just saying.

Excellent in theory, cannot see how it could be funded as clearly beyond the scope of a cottage industry, labour intensive cropping type of operation.

#32: One big difference is the amount of smoke released into the atmosphere. This impacts not only on those of us with respiratory problems but on the whole planet because it adds to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Posted by Tim Thorne on 26/04/16 at 12:41 PM

TT @ #33

Fair enough re smoke.

... and the greenhouse gases produced in gathering up, chipping or pulverising biomass, handling, transporting and redistributing on site not to mention design, construct, commission and power a large scale pyrolysis plant somewhere centralised ?

Just not as obvious as a good convection column

Where does it end ?

How to get it cost effective ?

Someone has to underwrite this, so there has to be saleable energy as an end product I would think.

Posted by MJF on 26/04/16 at 06:07 PM

#31 Robin Halton: Speaking of birds, I guess you are all for burning eagles?